Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ohioWfan
I thought that it was well established that she was no longer undercover, and that there was no crime in revealing her identity because of that fact.

Agreed. I heard her boss say say that. I don't understand why that's even considered not established fact at this point.

82 posted on 10/26/2005 10:58:46 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]


To: twigs
Rush was saying today that there must be something else going on because there clearly was no crime committed in 'outting' Valerie Plame.

The media (even Fox) keeps talking as though it was a crime, but I've heard many say that no law was broken, even in the worst case scenario.

I'm beginning to agree that this is over. Friday we'll find out.

90 posted on 10/26/2005 11:09:35 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

To: twigs
Nope. You heard someone who was her boss years before she ever met Wilson and who left the Agency in 1990 say that.

Her bosses in 2003 sent a criminal referral to the DOJ after Novak published her name, and the spokesman for her bosses told Novak not to publish her name.

IOW, Rustmann doesn't have the final say on her status, and may not even have a basis to know. That's why it is not considered established fact.

92 posted on 10/26/2005 11:11:36 AM PDT by lugsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson